Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Meeting Room - Cherry Trees Day Centre
Contact: James Goddard Committee Manager
Note: Planning and Community Items - Committee are minded not to consider application 12/0342/FUL 34 Clifton Road at the request of the Applicant who has withdrawn it
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Election of Chair and Vice Chair Minutes: Councillor Owers proposed, and Councillor
Marchant-Daisley seconded, the nomination of Councillor Blencowe as Chair. Resolved (by 9 votes to 0) that Councillor Blencowe be Chair for the ensuing year. Councillor Blencowe assumed the Chair from the
Committee Manager at this point. Councillor Benstead proposed, and Councillor
Pogonowski seconded, the nomination of Councillor Owers as Vice Chair. Resolved (by 9 votes to 0) that Councillor Owers be Vice Chair for the ensuing
year. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Apologies For Absence Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillor Smart. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Declarations Of Interest Members of the committee are asked to declare any interests in the items
on the agenda. In the case of any doubt, the advice of the Head of Legal should
be sought before the meeting.
Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Appointment to Outside Bodies • Cambridge Airport
Consultative Committee • East Barnwell Community Centre Minutes: Councillor Herbert proposed the nomination of
Councillor Hart as the representative for Cambridge Airport Consultative
Committee. Resolved (by 9 votes to 0) that Councillor Hart be the representative for Cambridge Airport
Consultative Committee for the ensuing year. Councillor Herbert proposed the nomination of
Councillor Johnson as the representative for East Barnwell Community Centre. Resolved (by 9 votes to 0) that Councillor Johnson be the representative for
East Barnwell Community Centre for the ensuing year. |
|||||||||||||||||||
To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 12 April 2012. Minutes: The minutes of the 12 April 2012 meeting were approved and signed as a
correct record. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Matters & Actions Arising From The Minutes PDF 19 KB Reference will be
made to the Committee Action Sheet available
under the ‘Matters & Actions Arising From The Minutes’ section of the
previous meeting agenda. General agenda
information can be accessed using the following hyperlink: http://www.cambridge.gov.uk/democracy/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeId=147 Additional documents: Minutes: (i) 12/13/EAC Apologies For Absence
“Action Point: Councillor Blencowe to pass on East Area Committee’s thanks to
Councillor Wright for her service.” Councillor Blencowe has passed on East Area Committee’s
thanks and best wishes to Councillor Wright. (ii) 12/16/EAC Matters & Actions Arising From The
Minutes “Action Point: Councillor Sedgwick-Jell to respond to Dr Eva’s Riverside Place gritting
concerns raised in ‘open forum’ section. Councillor Sedgwick-Jell to clarify
position with Graham Hughes (Service Director, Growth & Infrastructure –
County) to ascertain gritting schedule.” Councillor Sedgwick-Jell continues to follow up the gritting issue with
County Officers, and has asked them to make the Riverside Place cycle lane and
road a priority. Councillor Sedgwick-Jell hoped to bring back a further report to the
next East Area Committee (EAC) 2 August 2012. (iii) 12/16/EAC Matters & Actions Arising From The
Minutes “Action Point: Councillor Blencowe to liaise with the Streets and Open
Spaces Asset Manager plus Mr Woodburn to ensure the Clifton Road tree planting
query has been resolved.” The Open Spaces Asset Manager
is following up this issue. (iv) 12/17/EAC
Open Forum “Action Point: Councillor Blencowe to liaise with Andy Preston (Project Delivery &
Environment Manager) regarding adding the assessment of the Palmer’s Walk path
to the environmental improvement projects scheme.” Councillor Blencowe said the Palmer’s Walk path proposal would be considered
for inclusion in the next round of environmental improvement projects. (v) 12/17/EAC
Open Forum matter arising: Addenbrooke’s bus service concern Councillor Johnson said that he and Councillor Sadiq met with Councillor
Ward to discuss this issue. (v) 12/20/EAC Community Olympics
Art Project “Action Point: Committee Manager to publish Same Sky artist
contact details so Cambridge residents can volunteer to participate in the
Community Olympics Public Art Project.” Details published through minutes on 12/04/12 EAC webpage. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Open Forum Refer to the ‘Information for the Public’ section for rules on speaking. Minutes: 1. Mr Stamp
raised concerns about street life anti-social behaviour (ASB) in Mill Road and the
surrounding area. Mr Stamp was also concerned by slow Police response times to
calls logged via the #101 number Councillor Bourke said that drug and alcohol related street life ASB in
the East of the city was a Police priority set by EAC at the 12 April meeting.
Councillor Bourke had spoken to PCSOs and local officers, who said they were
monitoring reported issues. Councillor Owers felt there had been improvements just after the Police
priority was set, but issues had noticeably arisen again recently. Councillor Marchant-Daisley said she was aware of specific ASB issues in
Norfolk Street. EAC Members encouraged members of the public to log ASB incidents via
the #101 number so the Police could gather trend information. EAC noted members
of the public dissatisfaction with call response times. ACTION POINT: Councillors Bourke and Marchant-Daisley to
meet with ward residents and shopkeepers to discuss drug
and alcohol related street life ASB in the area around Mill Road and Norfolk Street. Issues to
be reported back to 2 August 2012 EAC. 2. Mr Rogers raised concerns that PCSOs did
not challenge street life ASB. Councillor
Blencowe said that drinking in the street was not an offence, whereas ASB was.
PCSOs faced a dilemma on when to take action so charges could realistically be brought
against suspects. 3. Mr Rogers raised concerns that Stagecoach
had changed the #3 bus route and that alternative services were unsatisfactory
as they covered different routes and caused longer waiting times. Councillor Sadiq was unhappy that bus companies could change routes
without consultation, this meant that some areas lost services. Councillor
Sadiq signposted the County Council Transport Strategy available on its website.
He encouraged members of public to respond to the consultation. Councillor Johnson felt that the #3 bus route had been changed without
sufficient warning from Stagecoach. ACTION POINT: Councillor Johnson to raise EAC bus service
concerns, specifically changes to the #3 bus route, with Andy
Campbell (Stagecoach). 4. Mrs Deards queried progress on Budleigh
Close/Tiverton Way double yellow line joint minor works scheme with the County
Council. ACTION POINT:
Councillor Herbert to respond to Mrs Deards after liaising with Andy
Preston (Project Delivery & Environment Manager). 5. Dr Eva queried why cycle racks were not
available outside community centers owned by the City Council, or ones used by
them as voting stations. Councillors welcomed Dr Eva’s comments and his suggestions to provide
cycle racks. Councillors Blencowe and Hart said that some of the premises the
Council uses were owned by other organisations, thus it was difficult to impose
a requirement for cycle racks on these organisations. Councillor Sedgwick-Jell suggested that cycle racks were generally added
to properties as a retrospective feature. He felt the planning process should
require cycle parking to be put in early in the design process. ACTION POINT: Councillor Hart to liaise with Clare Rankin
(Cycling & Walking Officer) and respond to Dr Eva to clarify if the River
Lane Community Centre has cycle racks or alternatives. 6. Dr Eva raised the following issues on behalf of Mr
Catto: ·
Littering around Tesco in Cheddars Lane. ·
Drug users and drug dealing in the Riverside
area. ·
A request for double yellow
lines along Riverside. ·
Residents were unhappy with
the choice of colour for Riverside railings selected by the Project
Delivery & Environment Manager. Councillor Johnson said that Tesco and the City Council had drawn up a
voluntary code through a Memorandum of Understanding to address the littering
issue. If Tesco did not meet cleansing standards, it may face enforcement
action. ACTION POINT: Councillor Johnson to raise drug
users and drug dealing in the Riverside area as a Police priority at 2 August
2012 EAC. ACTION POINT: Councillor Johnson to raise request for double
yellow lines along Riverside with Brian Stinton (Area Manager - County). ACTION POINT: Councillor Blencowe to raise resident’s concerns
with the choice of colour for Riverside railings
with the Project Delivery & Environment Manager. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Re-Ordering Agenda Under paragraph 4.2.1 of the Council Procedure Rules, the Chair used his discretion to alter the order of the agenda items. However, for ease of the reader, these minutes will follow the order of the agenda. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Planning Applications PDF 41 KB The applications for planning permission listed below require determination. A report is attached with a plan showing the location of the relevant site. Detailed plans relating to the applications will be displayed at the meeting. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0248/FUL: The Royal Standard, 292 Mill Road PDF 1 MB Minutes: The Committee received an application for full
planning permission. The application sought approval for erection of 5 houses and conversion/extension to
provide student accommodation (13 units). The Committee received representations in
objection to the application from the following local residents: ·
Ms Jeffery ·
Ms Walker The representations
covered the following issues: (i)
Referred to a
petition by 350 people supporting the retention of the Royal Standard.
Residents took issue with the proposed change of use from a pub into housing as
this would lead to the loss of a valued local amenity. (ii)
The area had
lost many pubs in recent years. (iii)
The Royal
Standard has a garden that is a valued open space amenity in the area. (iv)
An s106
payment in lieu of open space provision in the application was unacceptable due
to the lack of open space in the local area. (v)
The Royal
Standard was a building of historic interest in a Conservation Area. (vi)
The building
was an item of visual interest that contrasted with surrounding terrace houses. (vii)
Concerns about
overlooking and overshadowing from the application. It would also exascerbate
local parking issues. (viii)
Suggested the
application should be turned down due to policies in the Open Space Strategy,
Local Plan, National Planning Policy Framework and Parking Strategy. Mr Kratz (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application. Councillor Bourke
(Romsey Ward County Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application
through a statement read by the Committee Manager. The representation covered the following
issues: (i)
Several
professional bodies had expressed concerns on the level of technical detail in
the application. (ii)
The application would lead to an overdevelopment of the site. (iii)
Suggested the diminution
of the site’s garden contradicts the City Council’s Open Space Strategy. (iv)
A potential
community asset could be lost by converting the site of a former public amenity
into flats. (v)
The Royal
Standard is a “Building of Local Interest”, its loss would have a detrimental effect
on the site as a whole. The Committee: Resolved (by 10 votes to 1) to reject the officer recommendation to approve the application. Resolved
(unanimously) to refuse the
application contrary to the officer recommendations for the following reason: The proposal
involves the permanent loss of a former public house, whose value to the local
community is evidenced by the responses to the application. No adequate
evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the building could not be
returned to viable use as a public house, and as such form a valued community
facility. The proposal is consequently contrary to government guidance on
promoting healthy communities in section 8 of the National Planning Policy
Framework. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0490/FUL: 25 Cambridge Place PDF 770 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
change of use. The application sought approval for change of use from offices (Class use B1) to form
3 No. studios and 2No. 1Bed. flats with associated access arrangements and
external alterations. The Committee
received a representation in objection to the application from Ms Josselyn. The representation
covered the following issues: (i)
Concern over
lack of parking facilities for visitors and service personnel (eg cleaners). (ii)
Suggested the
development was only suitable for able bodied, young, single, childless people.
Thus it did not meet the needs of Cambridge’s diverse population in general (eg
the elderly), just the needs of some. (iii)
There was no
provision for an accessible lift or disabled parking. Mr McEwan (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application. The Committee: Resolved (by 5 votes to 4, with 2 abstentions) to reject the officer recommendation to
approve the application. Resolved (by 5
votes to 0) to refuse the
application contrary to the officer recommendations for the following reasons: 1. The
proposal provides no car parking space for visitors, contrary to policy 8/10 of
the Cambridge Local Plan (2006). 2. Cycle
parking and waste storage are not successfully integrated into the design. This
is likely to lead to waste bins and cycles being left outside the building,
detracting from the street scene and causing inconvenience to future residents
of the development and nearby occupiers. The proposal is therefore contrary to
policy 3/12 of the Cambridge Local Plan (2006) and to government guidance on
good design in section 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework. 3. The
proposed development does not make appropriate provision for public open space,
community development facilities, life-long learning facilities, waste storage,
waste management facilities and monitoring
in accordance with Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/8, 3/12 5/14 and
10/1, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003 policies P6/1 and
P9/8 and as detailed in the Planning Obligation Strategy 2010, the RECAP Waste
Management Design Guide SPD 2012 and the Open Space Standards Guidance for
Interpretation and Implementation 2010. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0255/FUL: Former Greyhound Public House, 93 Coldhams Lane PDF 1 MB Minutes: The Committee received an application for full
planning permission. The application sought approval for demolition of existing buildings and erection of
premises for B1/B2/B8 use including trade counters with associated access,
parking and landscaping The Committee: Resolved (by 8
votes to 1, with 2 abstentions) to accept the officer recommendation to approve planning permission
as per the agenda. Reasons for Approval 1. This development has been approved, conditionally, because
subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development
Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies: Cambridge Local Plan
(2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/11, 3/12, 4/1, 4/3, 4/6, 4/13, 7/1, 7/2, 8/2, 8/6,
8/9, 8/10; 2. The decision has been made having had regard to all other
material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of
such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission. These reasons for approval can be a summary of the
reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the
decision please see the officer report online at
www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre,
Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to
Friday. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0398/FUL: 50 Mill Road PDF 868 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for
change of use. The application sought approval for use of existing structure for use as a
"shisha" pipe smoking shelter. The Committee
received a representation in objection to the application from Mr Gawthrop. The representation
covered the following issues: (i)
Residents
mourned the loss of a general shop that has become a pipe shop and internet
cafe. (ii)
Residents were
concerned that retrospective changes of use had led to inappropriate premises
usage. Retrospective permission was sought after complaints by residents. (iii)
The shop was
used as a smoking area for the café, but technically met planning policy
through sui generis use. (iv)
The proposed application
was not the same as one given previous permission, as this was not implemented. Mr McEwan (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the application. The Committee: Resolved (by 10
votes to 1) to accept the
officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda. Reasons for Approval 1. This development has been approved, conditionally, because
subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development
Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies: East of England plan 2008:
SS1, ENV6 and ENV7 Cambridge Local Plan
(2006): 3/1, 3/4, 4/11, 4/13, 4/15, 6/7 and 6/10 2. The decision has been made having had regard to all other
material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of
such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission. These reasons for approval can be a summary of the
reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the
decision please see the officer report online at
www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre,
Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to
Friday. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0377/FUL: 23 Hooper Street PDF 720 KB Minutes: The Committee received an application for full
planning permission. The application sought approval for rear extension at ground and first floor levels. The Committee
received a representation in objection to the application from Mr Beauregard. The representation
covered the following issues: (i)
Concern
regarding impact of application on neighbours due to its size and potential
overshadowing effect. (ii)
Took issue
with paragraph 8.2 of the Officer’s report concerning similarity of application
to extensions at 106 and 108 Ainsworth Street. (iii)
Felt the
application was inappropriate in size for the Conservation Area. Dr Kantaris (Owner) addressed the
Committee in support of the application. The Committee: Resolved
(unanimously) to accept the
officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda. Reasons for Approval 1. This development has been approved, conditionally, because
subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development
Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies: East of England plan 2008:
SS1, ENV6 and ENV7 Cambridge Local Plan
(2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/14 and 4/11 2. The decision has been made having had regard to all other
material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of
such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission. These reasons for approval can be a summary of the
reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the
decision please see the officer report online at
www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre,
Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to
Friday. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0342/FUL: 34 Clifton Road PDF 370 KB Committee are minded not to consider application 12/0342/FUL: 34 Clifton Road at the request of
the Applicant who has withdrawn it Minutes: This item was
withdrawn from the agenda at the request of the Applicant who had withdrawn the
planning application. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0169/FUL: Site Adjacent 19 Sleaford Street PDF 657 KB Minutes: The Committee
queried if a decision on this application could be taken through Officer
delegated powers, and if so, would this delay proceedings. The Principal
Planning Officer advised that the decision on this application could be taken
through Officer delegated powers, and it would not delay proceedings. The Committee: Resolved (unanimously) to delegate this application to Officers as no objections had been received from members of the public and it had not been called in for scrutiny by Councillors. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0028/FUL: 1 Ferndale Rise PDF 4 MB Minutes: Councillor Blencowe withdrew from the meeting for this
item and did not participate in the discussion or decision making. Councillor Owers took the role of Chair. The Committee received an application for
full planning permission. The application sought approval for demolition of existing garage and single storey
extension and erection of 2 bedroom dwelling. Mr Joy (Applicant’s Agent)
addressed
the Committee in support of the application. The Committee: Resolved (by 10
votes to 0) to accept the
officer recommendation to approve planning permission as per the agenda
and pre-Committee amendments to recommendation as set out on the amendment
sheet: 1. APPROVE subject to the satisfactory completion of the s106 agreement by 31st
August 2012 and subject to the following conditions: (Conditions as per officer report) 2. Unless prior agreement has been obtained from the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chair and Spokesperson of this Committee to extend the period for completion of the Planning Obligation required in connection with this development, if the Obligation has not been completed by 31st August 2012, it is recommended that the application be refused for the following reason(s): The proposed development does not make appropriate provision for public open space, waste facilities and monitoring in accordance with Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/8 and 3/12, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003 policies P6/1 and P9/8 and as detailed in the Planning Obligation Strategy 2010 and the Open Space Standards Guidance for Interpretation and Implementation 2010. Reasons for Approval 1. This development has been approved subject to conditions and
the prior completion of a section 106 planning obligation (/a unilateral
undertaking), because subject to those requirements it is considered to conform
to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies: East of England plan 2008:
policies SS1, ENV7 and WM6 Cambridgeshire and
Peterborough Structure Plan 2003: policies P6/1 and P9/8 Cambridge Local Plan
(2006): policies 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/8, 3/10, 3/12, 8/6 and 8/10 2. The decision has been made having had regard to all other
material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of
such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission. These reasons for approval can be a summary of the
reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the
decision please see the officer report online at
www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre,
Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to
Friday. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0260/FUL: Ryedale House, 40 Cambridge Place PDF 1 MB Minutes: This item was
deferred to Monday 25 June 2012. |
|||||||||||||||||||
12/0058/FUL: Coleridge Community College, Radegund Road PDF 967 KB Minutes: This item was
deferred to Monday 25 June 2012. |
|||||||||||||||||||
General Items |
|||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: This item was
deferred to Monday 25 June 2012. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Minutes: This item was
deferred to Monday 25 June 2012. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Meeting Adjourned The Committee resolved by 10 votes to 0 to adjourn and reconvene on Monday 25 June 2012 to consider items 8i – 9b on the agenda. |